![gcambridge in color sns hdr gcambridge in color sns hdr](https://www.sns-hdr.com/gallery/image13l.jpg)
Therefore, it is necessary to implement policies that consider these variables. Health policies had an effect on slowing the pandemic’s propagation, but population density and mobility played a fundamental role. The policy index (coefficient 0.60, p < 0.01) and the income per capita (coefficient 3.36, p < 0.01) had a positive effect on doubling time by contrast, the population density (coefficient −0.012, p < 0.05), the mobility in parks (coefficient −1.10, p < 0.01) and the residential mobility (coefficient −4.14, p < 0.01) had a negative effect. Delay in the issuance of policies was associated with accelerated propagation. States with larger population sizes issued a larger number of policies. A panel data model was applied to measure the effect of these variables on doubling time. Additionally, variables such as population size and density, poverty and mobility were included. Policies issued by each of the 32 Mexican states during each week of this period were classified according to the University of Oxford Coronavirus Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT), and the doubling time of COVID-19 cases was calculated. A retrospective longitudinal study was carried out across March–August, 2020. The aim of the present investigation was to determine the impact of policies and several sociodemographic factors on the COVID-19 doubling time in Mexico. The doubling time is the best indicator of the course of the current COVID-19 pandemic. Taking more shots and making them be 2EV or less apart, is not a requirement for HDR, but for particular HDR sub-optimum tools such as Photomatix and PS HDR.Background.
#GCAMBRIDGE IN COLOR SNS HDR SOFTWARE#
The problem is in the software around: it is very sub-optimum in the information blending stage. Both arguments are wrong (the Zero Noise image above proves this): most HDR situations can be perfectly solved with just 2 shots, and 4EV apart is not at all too much. PS: one could argue two shots are not enough, or that 4 1/3EV apart in exposure is too much for HDR blending. If you try Photomatix the result is even funier: It performs progressive blending, making the final image noisier than it could be, and less sharp in the overlapped areas It produces ghosting (cutting the legs and suitcase of the man). It produces wrong colours because of partial saturation. It calculates a relative exposure of 4.26EV, when the correct one is 4.36EV. But shouldn't it be simple to correct this? Unlike your past experience with PS, I have been able to produce rather realistic looks with this program.Just try to fuse these two RAW files using PS: I'm not sure about PS making wrong relative exposure calculations though. leaves) are greatly dispaced from each shot. I honestly cannot detect any ghosting in most of the HDR images I took, unless the objects in the picture (eg. In both lighting was kept reasonably natural, without producing visible inconsistencies like those usually found on Photomatix tone mapped images.įinally just a proof of the need of doing several shots to cover the entire dynamic range, showing the noise comparision between the most exposed shot that preserved the highlights and the final fused image: However regarding local contrast TuFuse produced a more natural result while SNS-HDR obtained more texture where available, resulting a bit more unreal. The resulting image with default parameters was finished with a standard contrast curve:īoth programs respected the colours of the initial image, SNS-HDR saturating a bit. To do the automated tone mapping, several replicas of the ZN image were fed into TuFuse and SNS-HDR Lite. The resulting image histogram reveals about 13,5EV of dynamic range (the highlights peak corresponds to the tungsten lamps and their reflections): The gray tones in the following blending map indicate the source RAW used for every image area:
![gcambridge in color sns hdr gcambridge in color sns hdr](https://www.digitalphoto.de/media/digitalphoto/styles/tec_frontend_large/public/images/2021/06/image-323387--1842225.jpg)
The RAW files were optimally fused using Zero Noise. The outdoor highlights would have got blown a bit and the deep shadows would have become a bit less noisefree, but the final result would have been almost as good. Just the central 3 shots could have been used. To capture the entire dynamic range of the scene I used 5 shots 2EV apart: I made a comparision between TuFuse with default parameters vs SNS-HDR Lite for HDR tone mapping.